Kalashnikov's creation vs. Stoner's creation

[freepatriot]

At the request of a member here, I am posting pictures here of my Birchwood Casey steel spinner target that my SAR-1 destroyed. You can see that the Wolf 7.62x39 JHP bullets actually tore holes through the 1/4-inch steel.

Here are the pics:

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/mgomez81hole2.jpg

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/mgomez81hole1.jpg

In this second set of pictures, taken before the AK was set upon it, you can see "splashes of lead" that did not damage the steel... those marks came from .223 shot out of an AR15. That ammo came from my pal Dave who is a Coral Springs PD Officer and he serves on their SWAT team as a sniper. He got the ammo from the PD so I'd imagine it's pretty good stuff, but I couldn't tell you what kind it is.

(The damage to the steel that did not punch all the way through came from a .45 Long Colt shot out of a Ruger Blackhawk that I borrowed.)

Here are the AR15 PIcs:

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/aktargetIMG_2452.jpg

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/aktargetIMG_2454.jpg

These pics and this thread aren't to denegrate the Stoner platform, although I'm sure some will use it for that. I am simply filling a request from another GT'er who wanted to see the results of the two rifles on the same hard target.

Regards,
Scott

[GunZnWomen]

Thanks Scott. I very much appreciate you taking the time to post those pictures.

It was my request everyone. I pm'd Scott and made the request because I thought some here would really appreciate the different qualities of the two cartridges, and how they perform on solid steel.

Scott's pictures are the first still photos I have ever seen contrasting the performance of the two rounds on the SAME TARGET, let alone the same type of target. That's why I find them utterly fascinating. They are educational, to say the least.

Like Scott said, this is not to denigrate the AR platform or its ammunition, but to hopefully start a constructive discussion on the pros and cons of the Kalishnikov.

One pro I can see right away is a superiority in barrier penetration with the 7.62x39mm. And mind you, the 7.62 rounds were JHP!!! I assume the penetration would be even greater if it were FMJ, if that's possible.

One con I can see right away is overpenetration if dealing with hostage rescue or other close quarter situations where innocent nono-combatants are grouped together with the bad guys.

Anyways, I find these pictures awesome in what they reveal about the contrast in the abilities of the two rounds to penetrate 1/4" steel.

Thanks again Scott.

Have at it. ;)

[freepatriot]

Even more interesting is the damage inflicted by the .45 Long Colt. ;f

[vote Republican]

That's why my home defense rifle is an AR. I'd really like to know what type of ammo the PD was using, though.

That's also why I'm looking for a 30 caliber type SHTF rifle, but I'm leaning towards .308 for better long range work.

Hiya Scott!

[freepatriot]

Hiya, vR! :cool:

I'd like to fill in the gap in my arsenal below:

- Extreme-short range grasping at shirttails fightin: Glock 19 9mm and Benchmade Griptillian folder

- Across the cul-de-sac or across-the-intersection fighting: AK47 Clone (SAR-1)

- 25 Yard Squirrel & Rabbit Killer: Remington Pump-action .177 Air Rifle

- Down the street, multiple-hundred-yard shots at the enemy's commander: ==GAP IN ARSENAL==

- 50+ Yard Deer Killer: Winchester Lever-Action Model 88 in .308 Win

- Fun at the range plinking at 25 to 50 yards: Glock 17 9mm

- Fun at the range plinking at 50 to 100 yards: Smith & Wesson Model 19 in .38 Special and .357 Magnum

[Alldowntheline]

Worth a thousand words!

[arjohnson]

Try and find out what type of ammo you shot out of your AR, I'm sure a good brand of 5.56( Q3131A or Fed XM193 ) would penetrate that 1/4" plate, depending on the distance of course. The ammo that law enforcement uses may be that Hornady TAP or equivalant ammo which is not designed to over penetrate, that may be the reason. Just curious, thanks John

[Backfire]

Having and enjoying both a Bushmaster Match Target A2 with 20 inch barrel and an SAR-1 AK (7.62x39), I think they are almost "opposite" rifles in some respects. The AK family was intended for illiterate peasant conscripts who had never heard of toilet paper, can openers, or flush toilets (I have this from a former citizen of Soviet-occupied Czechoslovakia). The purpose was to spray lead all over the enemy position, keep their heads down, until troops could move closer with the heavy weapons to do the real damage. Individual marksmanship was never an issue. I can put Wolf 7.62 rounds into a pie plate at 50 yards offhand with the SAR-1. Fairly mediocre, but probably good enough for the world of AK and it's historically intended uses. Mikhail Kalashnikov himself (per History Channel interview) still believes a soldier's rifle should be goose-loose and not be at all fussy about cleaning, etc. Simplicity and reliability are most important in his mind, even though he is familiar with the M-16/AR and it's relatively fine mechanical tolerances.

I can put all my AR .5.56mm rounds into a couple of inches at 100 yards with reloads, old military ammo, nearly anything, no problem. Careful benchrest shooting with decent ammo gets me into the one inch neighborhood. Perhaps Stoner intended for soldiers to actually aim at and hit individual targets with the AR system (?)

Neither gun is the final answer, in my opinion. We need to have a rifle that combines the strengths of both designs and avoids the weaknesses of each. Both designs have been around for a very long time as far as military weapons go and it's time for a marriage ;z

I love 'em both. The AK might be the best for scaring the living crap out of someone, though. There's something so totally wicked, foreign, even alien about it's appearance.;b

[cocked@locked]

wow,cool pics i heard that the fmj russian surplus has a steel core and will supposedly stick to a magnet ill check that out later on tonight and see if that rumor holds true but im still pretty excited about the jhp penetrating that steel i did not expect that, seems pretty bad@$$ to me,but then it is an ak so i would not expect anything less than utter perfection,and like backfire said i do belive that a marriage is in order of the two designs i just hope im invited to the wedding

[GunZnWomen]

These pictures are extremely useful, because as AllDownTheLine said, a picture is worth a thousand words, and both platforms and cartridges have their 'ideal' applications. No matter how much is said, written or spoken about this, only the pictures drive the point home.

This is probably why the HK MP5 is the ideal close quarter combat weapon, and the platform of choice for anti-terror and hostage rescue speciality teams. The 9mm round it fires (and JHP at that) won't travel through three or four people at close range.

The AK round is devastating. I never expected to see JHP 7.62 rounds bust through a solid 1/4" thick steel plate, though.

Good, good stuff.

[MCM8691]

I would venture to say that those 7.62 Wolf HP rounds had the steel jacketed bullets, which don't expand upon impact, and will penetrate steel plate with ease, just like shown. Also, like arjohnson questioned, I'd be interested to know what type of bullets were shot out of the AR (more than likely not steel jacketed/cored, that mushroomed and failed to penetrate upon impact). IMO, to have a valid comparison of penetration performance between these two calibers, I think that the bullet types should be at least of comparable construction.

[GunZnWomen]

Originally posted by MCM8691
I would venture to say that those 7.62 Wolf HP rounds had the steel jacketed bullets, which don't expand upon impact, and will penetrate steel plate with ease, just like shown. Also, like arjohnson questioned, I'd be interested to know what type of bullets were shot out of the AR (more than likely not steel jacketed/cored, that mushroomed and failed to penetrate upon impact). IMO, to have a valid comparison of penetration performance between these two calibers, I think that the bullet types should be at least of comparable construction.

I concur.

Maybe Scott can find out what type of ammo the AR15 was fed when he gets a chance.

I have also heard and read quite a bit about how soft tip or hollow point 7.62x39mm doesn't really expand or mushroom in the manner that handgun ammo does. There's just not enough surface area at the tip to begin with. I don't know if the same is true of .223, though.

[DJ Niner]

Excellent post by Backfire, above.

You can "spray lead" with an accurate rifle/carbine, if neccessary, but making accurate longer-distance shots with a pistol-sighted sheet-metal carbine is much less likely. Now that securely-mounted optics are making an appearance on more AKs, it will be interesting to see how they perform in the ARs arena of longer-range shooting.

[Cali-Glock]

Just a reminder that the 7.62x39 round pre-dates Michael Kalashnikov's creation by about 7 or 8 years. (SKS)

As far as the impact. While Stoner created an awesome platform, how many people know who Eugene Stoner was? Only a few gun nuts, I would guess less than 10% of the users of Stoner's designs even know who he is. Kalashnikov on the other hand is a name which is known my millions.

Attached is a pastor (40+ years full time pastoral ministry) friend of mine shooting his Chinese Kalshnikov variant. He can empty a 30 round mag into a pie plate at 100 yards (typically one or two fliers). (The proper application of Luke 22:36 "…he that
has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.")

[cocked@locked]

^6 and the bible qoute really adds to the flavor

[freepatriot]

Hi again, folks.

The AR15 was shooting Winchester Match grain 65 grain ammo.

The Wolf JHP is indeed jacketed as MCM8691 said (hence the JHP) but I don't think it's steel-jacketed, could be.

I agree entirely with the asessment that the two weapons were intended for totally different purposes, and trying to compare one (the AR) negatively against the other (the AK) just doesn't make sense. They are two different platforms shooting tow different rounds for two different goals.

But fun to look at, huh?

[Agrippa]

http://www.ryano.net/iraq/?51961

[GunZnWomen]

http://www.ryano.net/iraq/?55975

:cool:

[J.R. Bob Dobbs]

Stoner and Kalashnikov examine each others creations:

[Backfire]

Here's what really happened (apologies to Dr. Kalashnikov and Eugene Stoner).;)

[Backfire]

Here's what happened (try again!)...

[Backfire]

One more sacrilige....

[Backfire]

Try once more...

[vote Republican]

Originally posted by J.R. Bob Dobbs
Stoner and Kalashnikov examine each others creations:
That's a great picture!

[GunZnWomen]

I have to be "fair and balanced" in keeping with my earlier comments.

http://www.ryano.net/iraq/?77140

[p01ic3m4n]

i had similar results with wolf JHPs. i bought a steel swinging target. one round tore the rod that goes in the ground in half. another did not penetrate the steel completely, but the round cracked the steel in a circle about 2" in diameter. it pushed that entire piece back far enough that you could see through the crack. i'll have to find it and put up a picture.

i was impressed when i did that, even at the loss of a good target.

[TommyG19]

I'll have to remember this thread next time I'm being attacked by Robots.

[V8Astro Captain]

I've shot SS109 ammo thru 5/8" thick steel plate at 50 yds with a 16" bbl Armalite carbine. It made wicked looking Terminator 2-T1000-just-got-owned-in-his-liquid-metal-head-with-a-shotgun-holes.

This may not be apples and apples, but it canbe done with the .223.

[Hoingshiba]

For what its worth I was at the range with my sks a while back and There was an overturned bucket someone had left out there at about 100 yards. So I started shooting at it and saw it slowly topple over. When I went to replace some other targets, I looked closer and found the bucket had been full of large cement chunks, now with holes through them and both sides of the bucket. The 7.62x39 is plenty powerful enough for the use of most people.

[glocknload76]

Disclaimer: Proud owner of a VEPRII in 7.62 and I think the Kalashnikov is the superior operating system. Operating system, not the results it produces.

We all know the ballistic differences between 7.62 and 5.56. 7.62 is a slower round, with average velocity of 2300 FPS, while 5.56 easily around 3000 FPS. This allows for the flatter trajectory and longer range accuracy all the AR owners enjoy. The faster moving bullet also allows for very good AP characteristics, as the fast moving bullet kind of "liquidizes" when it impacts metal, burning a hole through the metal it impacts. It can also tear through ceramic/titanium plate body armor.

That said, check out this Barnaul ammo page. It has some very interesting charts comparing new production 7.62AP and 5.45 AP bullets. The new 7.62 bullet easily matches a 5.45 AP round - even all the way out to 250 meters.

http://barnaulammo.terrashare.com/new_ap.htm

On Edit, this is comapring 5.45, not 5.56, but I still think the results are comparable to the 5.56 .223 rounds.

[Decguns]

I've had no problem shooting through 3/8 inch armor plate with M193 ammo out of a T/C Contender (range 25 meters). I've never managed to get Wolf HP ammo to penetrate the same armor plate. It'll make a good dent, but not travel through.

Here's the official minimum distances 5.56 will penetrate a sheet of NATO armor plate (3.5mm SAE1010 hardness 100HB):

M193 (1-12 twist): 400 meters
M855 (1-12 twist): 416 meters
M855 (1-7 twist): 640 meters

[ChuteTheMall]

Originally posted by scottauld

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/mgomez81hole2.jpg

http://freepatriot.com/imagewarehouse/mgomez81hole1.jpg





Well, I guess I won't bother taking cover behind 1/4" steel unless my adversaries only have varmint ammo. :wavey:

[454]

Wolf JHP ARE steel jacketed. They are copper-washed, hence the "bi-metal" moniker.
Just grabbed an assortment of Wolf JHP/FMJ, Uli FMJ/JHP, Barnaul SP, Golden Tiger FMJ (and now you know what I have or might not have in my safe :) )---all steel jacketed (stick to the magnet).

No Russian steel-cored ammo has been imported in YEARS.

I do find Wolf JHP to be more accurate than FMJ, and Ulyanovsk JHP (ie Wolf Calssic JHP) is just maaaaaaarvelous. :)

[MrMurphy]

The AK was not necessarily designed to "spray lead". It was not designed for sustained full auto fire through mag after mag (neither was the AR).

The Soviets were big believers in fire superiority with good reason after fighting Germans. They fought in mechanized infantry formations. The artillery, mortars, tank rounds, machine guns (mounted) and machine guns (squad level and higher) put out more than enough lead to "keep their heads down" to let the infantry get into range and start fighting. Since the 20s the Russians and Germans were trying to develop assault rifles, the idea was to give you a high-ammo-count, fairly accurate, compact rifle, fired primarily on semi. Yes, you put a lot of lead in the air but not just by random spraying.

The Russians already had the PPSh-41 SMG, 7.62X25mm with a 71 round drum. They equipped entire battalions with nothing else in some cases. If all they wanted to do was keep their heads down and throw lead, teh PPSh was a master at that. However, it's individual accuracy wasn't the greatest and any SMG is pushing it to hit accurately past 100 yards.

The AK gave a mix of rifle and SMG performance out to 200-300m (realistically, 200m), with reliability of course coming over accuracy in a Russian weapon. The Russians knew they needed accurate longer shots at time, which is why, forty years ago they started introducing Dragunov designated marksman's rifles into the platoon level (eventually, squad, in Afghanistan).... like we are doing today.

In the lead-spraying department, once the AK began it's reign, the PPSh rather quickly disappeared in Russian service because it's time was done. The only reason the AK and Stg44 and other medium caliber rifles even have the auto setting is because it gave confidence to the shooters, in a Holy Crap situation as you're being overrun, might as well take a bunch with you, and for close quarters work where SMGs used to rule, such as trenches, indoors and room-to-room.

And yes, I've spoken about this at length to two former Soviet infantrymen, one a sergeant who had been in Afghanistan, the other a sergeant who also had been in A-stan and survived to become a FRS lieutenant when the USSR bit the dust. He then went on to Chechnya before emigrating to the US.

Both loved the AK74, and respected the AK47.
Both thought the Stechkin machine pistol was good for close quarters, and the Makarov was a status symbol, really only good for committing suicide if the Afghans were about to capture you (and then torture you to death).

[crazymoose]

Originally posted by MrMurphy
The AK was not necessarily designed to "spray lead". It was not designed for sustained full auto fire through mag after mag (neither was the AR).

The Soviets were big believers in fire superiority with good reason after fighting Germans. They fought in mechanized infantry formations. The artillery, mortars, tank rounds, machine guns (mounted) and machine guns (squad level and higher) put out more than enough lead to "keep their heads down" to let the infantry get into range and start fighting. Since the 20s the Russians and Germans were trying to develop assault rifles, the idea was to give you a high-ammo-count, fairly accurate, compact rifle, fired primarily on semi. Yes, you put a lot of lead in the air but not just by random spraying.

The Russians already had the PPSh-41 SMG, 7.62X25mm with a 71 round drum. They equipped entire battalions with nothing else in some cases. If all they wanted to do was keep their heads down and throw lead, teh PPSh was a master at that. However, it's individual accuracy wasn't the greatest and any SMG is pushing it to hit accurately past 100 yards.

The AK gave a mix of rifle and SMG performance out to 200-300m (realistically, 200m), with reliability of course coming over accuracy in a Russian weapon. The Russians knew they needed accurate longer shots at time, which is why, forty years ago they started introducing Dragunov designated marksman's rifles into the platoon level (eventually, squad, in Afghanistan).... like we are doing today.

In the lead-spraying department, once the AK began it's reign, the PPSh rather quickly disappeared in Russian service because it's time was done. The only reason the AK and Stg44 and other medium caliber rifles even have the auto setting is because it gave confidence to the shooters, in a Holy Crap situation as you're being overrun, might as well take a bunch with you, and for close quarters work where SMGs used to rule, such as trenches, indoors and room-to-room.

And yes, I've spoken about this at length to two former Soviet infantrymen, one a sergeant who had been in Afghanistan, the other a sergeant who also had been in A-stan and survived to become a FRS lieutenant when the USSR bit the dust. He then went on to Chechnya before emigrating to the US.

Both loved the AK74, and respected the AK47.
Both thought the Stechkin machine pistol was good for close quarters, and the Makarov was a status symbol, really only good for committing suicide if the Afghans were about to capture you (and then torture you to death).

Good post. We've been fighting idiots with AKs for so long that many people have just come to the conclusion that it was designed specifically for idiots.

One unfair comparison a lot of people make is some beaten up '50s vintage AK (like most of our enemies carry) with a brand-spanking-new tricked out AR/SPR.

I've shot a bunch of AKs and ARs (never in combat, so take my opinion for what it's worth) and I'm convinced that with better sights (i.e. Krebs peep sight and/or a dot optic), the AK is just about as suitable for close-med range work as the AR is. Offhand hits with the AK are fairly easy to 300 yards. The AR's accuracy allows for longer-range hits with more frequency, but you're pushing the 5.56x45's effective range at that point.

Mounting systems like the Ultimak and the side-clamp type allow the AK to have most of the optics which an AR can mount, which have increased the AR's effectiveness so much. There are also furniture sets that fit larger westerners much more comfortably than the shorter Warsaw pact length. In light of this, I'd say that the AKs only real deficiencies are the placement of the safety and the slightly slower mag changes- IMO, these are niggling points at best, and they can easily be corrected, as in the Valmet, SIG 550, and other continuations of the AK line.

[3/325]

You'll have to forgive me if this question is ignorant but why are you comparing a 7.62 to a Stoner 5.56 instead of Stoner 7.62? Are you comparing Kal vs. Stoner in general, or just the most common Kal vs the most common Stoner?

(Impressive results, btw)

[MrMurphy]

The 5.56 and 7.62X39 were created to fill the same role, where as the 7.62Nato is really a .30-06 Lite.


Quite a few countries with a choice have ended up choosing the AK system and upgrading it (Switzerland, the Sig 550 series, Israel with the Galil among others) or just using the basic AK system dressed up better with better quality (Finland, Valmet series). Even the Russians have constantly upgraded and tried to make the AK better over the last 30 or so years, and have.

The placement of the safety is Kalashnikov's fault, but the mag release is similar to most other combat rifles (G3, etc), not really a speedy method, but secure.

The short stock on the AK was deliberate. Russians fight in cold weather. Cold= thick winter gear. Instead of designing a long stock and having to get around it, he kept it shorter, since any long-armed guy can shoot a shorter stock if he has to. And if you're wearing body armor and/or cold weather gear, the AK stock is "ok" lengthwise.

[crazymoose]

Originally posted by MrMurphy
The placement of the safety is Kalashnikov's fault, but the mag release is similar to most other combat rifles (G3, etc), not really a speedy method, but secure.

The short stock on the AK was deliberate. Russians fight in cold weather. Cold= thick winter gear. Instead of designing a long stock and having to get around it, he kept it shorter, since any long-armed guy can shoot a shorter stock if he has to. And if you're wearing body armor and/or cold weather gear, the AK stock is "ok" lengthwise.


To be honest, I don't really mind either the stock length or the safety. I can reach the safety with my trigger finger, and I've never really cared about "length of pull" on any rifle (and I'm 6'3" w/long arms). But these are the points I hear people complain about most on the AK.